PEACE BY PEACEFUL MEANS

Conflict
and revolution have become a culture of the country. Be it chanting slogans
against Panchayat system in 1990, or suffering armed conflict for a decade
starting 1996, the Madhesh Movement, the Tharuhat movement and the like.
However, the warring parties have always reached a negotiated settlement. The
Maoists, as well, who took up arms, handed them over and entered a negotiated
comprehensive peace agreement. Ten years on, the recurrence of another cycle of
armed revolt seems to be in the making. An armed outfit named as Nepal
Communist Party and led by Netra Bikram Chand “Biplab” has decided to up the
ante. The government has outlawed the outfit and has followed coercive course
of action against them.

Securitization
failed in the past in dealing with the erstwhile Maoist. Same course of action
would be compelled to fail again. Going by the speech of the Home Minister in
the parliament, the outfit is getting stronger. The government, specially, the
Home Minister and the Prime Minister, has been addressing the issue in fuelling
the resurgence of violence rather than contain9mg it peacefully. Nevertheless, Pushpa
Kamal Dahal, Prachanda, NCP-Co Chair and erstwhile Maoist Supremo claims that
the environment for talks is in the making, however. Unfortunate coincidence in
Nepalese politics, the ones leading the government[1]
and the others revolting were once together against the state in the past. When
many have come into the mainstream politics of ballots, some have separated
themselves and have bullets with them.

The
armed struggle of the past ended in a peaceful settlement and with the
promulgation of constitution as an outcome of two successive constituent
assemblies, the country has introduced federal model of governance in the
country. After the elections for all three tiers of government – local,
provincial, and federal – the country has travelled the course for more than a
year now. However, the performance of the governments and the leaderships no
way matches the spirit of federalism that was thought to be a panacea for all
ills in the country, and all hopes are weakening.

Contemporarily,
the country is tri-polarized: i) the ruling party NCP at one pole, ii) the
opposition NC and RPP-N and Monarchy at the other, and iii) the fringe parties
like Nayashakti, RJP-N, and other leftist groups including Biplab on the third.
The country will have three courses ahead – i) the incumbent government with
increased corruption and impunity; ii) instability in the name of religion; and
iii) merger of fringe leftist parties on the agenda of inclusive democracy,
good governance, and prosperity.

The
decade of armed struggle in Nepal that started in 1996 ended in a peace
agreement. The recent events have indicated resurgence of violence in the
country once again. And as violence generates its own logic, the outlawed armed
outfit reasoned their violence as the outcome of police killing of its cadre in
Bhojpur. The multiple bomb blasts carried out in the capital in the last week
of May claimed four lives and injured seven.

Ironically,
the government seems to have strong inclination towards centralization of power
at the federal level and mostly within the prime minister. The anti-federal bureaucracy, security
agencies, and leadership at helm do not show any symptom of course correction.
The activity of the president and the desires of power and glamour has created
more hatred than love towards the institution. Various laws that the federal
parliament has brought up is against the constitution, more specifically
against federalism. The greed to hold more budget at the discretion of federal
government and development budget allocation to parliamentarians are another
example of anti-federal characteristic of the government.

The
government should think themselves to be the sole representative and authority of
the country. There would not have been
the armed struggle had the multi-party democracy delivered as per the
aspiration of the people. But now, with federalism, it is not only decentralization,
but sharing of power among the federal government, seven provinces, and 753
local governments, which is the need of the hour.

They
must be well aware of the fact that when the government doesn’t deliver what it
should and focuses on gaining power, it will aggravate public dissatisfaction, frustration,
discontent, and anger. The leadership must be very careful about this in the
days to come or else the possibility of another cycle of armed violence cannot
be overruled. The government, instead of containing the party through talks, again
seems to be on the path of inviting another round of violent conflict. There is the security agency and there are
the revolutionaries who would not be scared to take up arms. The performance of
the government has not gathered required inertia of resentments against them. Until
then, the government shall keep dancing in its own beats. When the people are
compelled to change the music again for good, the stage will no more be there for
them. The achievement made so far at a huge cost of lives and transitional injuries
that the country suffered could be jeopardized should the government opt for
securitization and forceful containment of the outlawed armed outfit.

The
government should deliver in the spirit of Nepal’s Constitution, with
commitment to institutionalizing federalism, as the model has been decided as a
resolution to all conflicts in the country. The demands of the outfit and any
other parties who have concerns can hence be discussed and considered if that
is in the best interest of the country and the people. Divisions, deviation,
and detachment of political forces can never provide required momentum for the agenda
of good governance, inclusive democracy, and prosperity.

Historically,
solutions to conflicts have always come through peaceful negotiations, talks
and sharing of power. Peace is possible only through peaceful means and not
violence.

[1]
The erstwhile Maoist now merged into NCP is in the Government of the day.